Reader comments · Cameron praises civil partnerships but prepares to put Iain Duncan Smith in charge of families · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Cameron praises civil partnerships but prepares to put Iain Duncan Smith in charge of families

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Did he say anything about why he used to oppose civil partnerships for same-sex couples? And why he changed his mind?

  2. I have sent the following email to Cameron. I shall be most interested in his response:

    Iain Duncan Smith

    Does David Cameron’s praise of Duncan Smith at the Conservative Party Conference extend to the following?:

    Duncan Smith is the head of the Centre for Social Justice, which recommended in July that some rights of same-sex partners who are not biological parents should be downgraded.

    These views are clearly those of a Roman Catholic opposed to equality for people in Civil Partnerships. Could you please let me know whether or not it is Conservative policy to accept Duncan Smith’s recommendation that these existing rights be downgraded?

  3. Simon Murphy 8 Oct 2009, 3:46pm

    Iain Duncan Smith to ‘mend broken society’?

    How very sinister. Iain Duncan Smith is a homophobe.

    I wonder what nasty plans he has for us (apart from removing parental rights of non-biological gay parents?).

    Iain Duncan Smith like Tony Blair is a convert to the catholic cult but a much more hateful, discriminatory version of catholicism. I wonder why Camerson is appointing a religious extremist like Smith to ‘mend broken society’

    What out queers – the Tories are coming for your rights.

  4. Simon Murphy 8 Oct 2009, 3:55pm

    Sent: 08 October 2009 14:55:06

    Dear Mr Cameron

    I read today that you intend to appoint Iain Duncan Smith to a position to ‘mend broken society’ if your party wins the next election.

    Duncan Smith is the head of the Centre for Social Justice, which recommended in July that some rights of same-sex partners who are not biological parents should be downgraded.

    Could you please let me know whether or not it is Conservative policy to accept Duncan Smith’s recommendation that these existing rights be downgraded?

    If it is Conservative policy then I will not be voting for your party at the next election. I cannot support a homophobic party.

    Yours sincerely

  5. vulpus_rex 8 Oct 2009, 4:07pm

    Sent: 08 October 2009 16:08

    Dear David Cameron

    Do watch out for emails from people like Simon Murphy, they are closed minded and hate the Tory party so nothing you could possibly do would ever appease them anyway.

    Thanks for the commitment to extend tax breaks to civil partnerships, and I think Ian Duncan Smith will do an excellent job of repairing the damage caused by Labour.



  6. Search pink news for all the comments and stories about “Iain Duncan Smith”

  7. So Vulpy is happy that Duncan Smith’s recommendations to remove some rights from gay couples should be Conservative policy. What an ignorant, little man!

  8. London Ibis 8 Oct 2009, 4:16pm

    Sent: 08 October 2009 16:10

    Hiya Dave!

    Is this really you?

    I think I left my knickers at your house.


    London Ibis

  9. Simon Murphy 8 Oct 2009, 4:19pm

    So Vulpy – you actually think Iain Duncan Smith is a suitable person to be in charge of families given his efforts to remove the parental rights of non-biological gay parents?

    If you are representative of the Tory Party then it’s quite obvious that no sane gay person could ever vote Tory.

  10. vulpus_rex 8 Oct 2009, 4:23pm

    Get stuffed Neville – ignorant means uknowing or unaware, I might just not care! I’d much rather the focus was on improving the lot of everyone whose misery has just increased under this lot.

    If you and Mr Murphy for that matter could step out of your bubble for a second you might see that it’s not all about the rights of same sex couples.

    And what has my height got to do with anything?

  11. (To Simon Murphy in particular) Doesn’t it get tiring being constantly outraged?

    “If you are representative of the Tory Party then it’s quite obvious that no sane gay person could ever vote Tory.”

    As a gayer who’s a Tory, and for the hundreds of thousands of others who are too – thanks that’s a very construcitve comment and no less than I’d expect looking at your past comments.

    Do you really believe that the Conservative Party is out to get you? Can’t you recognise that organisatoins can change? That most of the MPs in the next government were not part of Thatcher’s government? (And yes, Thatcher doesn’t have a proud record on gay rights…) Why assume that one failed leader is somehow going to be able to regress the modern Tory party back to the middle ages?
    Are you always prepared to jump to such uninformed judgements?

  12. Simon Murphy 8 Oct 2009, 4:39pm

    My judgements are not ‘uninformed’

    I am willing to accept that the Tories have changed but the evidence strongly indicates that this has not happened.

    The ONLY evidence that the Tories have changed is David Cameron’s statements that they are now an inclusive party committed to equal rights for LGBT people.

    On the other hand the evidence that Cameron is merely engaging in PR bullsh*t is mounting.

    1. The Tory denial that their European allies are fascist homophobes (the Law and Justice Party) is quite obviously untrue. The leader of the far-right Law and Justice Party thinks acceptance of homosexualty will lead to the destruction of civilisation.

    2. Cameron claims that Civil Partnerships are a ‘good thing’ while at the same time appointing the homophobic catholic convert Iain Duncan Smith (the man who wants to reduce the parental rights of non-biological gay parents) to mend our ‘broken society’

    3. David Cameron himself has only supported 3 out of 13 gay rights votes.

    Of course other issues are important in the election. But this is a gay news website. And when it comes to gay specific issues it is quite obvious that the Tories are the WORST of the mainstream parties.

  13. I assume Charles is quite happy with the homophobic Iain Duncan Smith and with his efforts to undermine some rights granted
    to those in civil partnerships. The argument here is not with Cameron or the Conservative party, but with Cameron’s ill-advised choice of Duncan Smith. However, it will be interesting to see whether or not Cameron repudiates Duncan Smith’s desire to remove some rights from gay couples.

  14. So we have it Iain Duncan Smith minister for families and his evangelical Christian pit-bull Philippa Stroud as his parliamentary private secretary no doubt.

    How long before we have a new section 28!

  15. Despite my comments above (Post 15), I must say that I agree with Simon Murphy’s comments in Post 14.

  16. vulpus_rex 8 Oct 2009, 4:58pm

    “But this is a gay news website” – so effing what it doesn’t preclude considering the whole rather than the part.

    1. One person has reportedly said homophobic things, ooh so let’s dismiss the whole of a political party. You massively exaggerate the importance of one aspect of a party’s activity, and vastly overstate the importance of Polish politician’s influence on UK politics.

    2. IDS is not homophobic, he happens to disagree with the importance placed by others on the right of both female parents to have their name on a birth certificate after IVF. Again you massively trivialise homophobia by describing a difference of opinion as such.

    3. Isn’t that still more than Gordon Brown? You completely selectively of course negelect to mention the recent apology for clause 28.

    I would say that on the whole that you are indulging in PR Bullsh*t and should stop calling the kettle black.

  17. I’m quite happy to have IDS in the party but that is not to say I subscribe to all his views and nor would I wish him to be the only one setting policy in this area. I’m sure he will contribute as will Nick Herbet, Alan Duncan, Greg Barker, etc. and all the views and opinions of the party will be moderated into an acceptable policy.

    I agree, I don’t think the Tory party has had the best record of the 2 parties that have been in power over the last 50 years but to pretend that the Labour party is somehow morally superior in this respect is risible – parties are made up of broad spetrums of ideas and opinions and there are as many homphobes in the Labour Party as there are the Tory party. Is the collective memory so short as to forget Ruth Kelly was Communities (Diversity) Minister? Now that was someone’s idea of a good joke!

    Here’s an idea, if we accept since the last Tory government there is a new leader and most of the MPs have changed or will be part of the new influx and they have gay-friendly policies why not let’s see if they can live up to their promises. Otherwise you speculating without basis.
    Or, of course, you are just an iredeemablly narky socialist who is never going to like the Tories and is using the cover of gay issues to constantly put the boot in to the next government?

  18. vulpus_rex 8 Oct 2009, 5:07pm

    “Or, of course, you are just an iredeemablly narky socialist who is never going to like the Tories and is using the cover of gay issues to constantly put the boot in to the next government?”

    That Charles, sums up about 99% of anti-tory sentiment. Chippy, small minded and stuck in student union politics.

  19. Carl Rowlands 8 Oct 2009, 5:13pm

    I remember two events that impacted on my life in my late teens. I am now 45. Firstly Section 28 which was just down right nasty. The impact that this had on schools was enormous. The responsbuility for sex education which included gay issues was devolved to the Chairman of Governors of each school in the Education Act 1986. Section 28 (1988) applied to Local Authorities and not schools but we did not know that at the time….which is why there were no prosecutions.

    The Second was when a very good friend of received his 18th birthday card with the inscription ‘only 3 years to go – happy birthday’ Chortle! Seems such a long time ago – but was it really? The conservative party and the gay vote – never forget Margaret T and Ann Widdecombe who stated “Gay lifestyles do not have “equal validity” with heterosexual relationships”


  20. Justin Hinchcliffe 8 Oct 2009, 5:14pm

    Excellent speech by David Cameron. EVERYONE should get behind him and give him the opportunity to transform our country. Labour has run and ruined Britain for far too long; it’s time for positive change!

  21. If your planning to adopt I would register now before its too late under IDS minister for families!

  22. Charles mentions Ruth Kelly. She, of course, like Duncan Smith and Anne Widdlebum, was a Roman Catholic. Roman Catholics are nothing if not anti-gay!

  23. The future for gay people is in the High Courts, and the European Courts.

  24. Justin Hinchcliffe, of Haringey Conservatives LOL LOL LOL

  25. vulpus_rex 8 Oct 2009, 5:33pm

    “Justin Hinchcliffe, of Haringey Conservatives LOL LOL LOL”

    What is so amusing pray tell? Is it the conservative bit or Haringey bit. I personally would applaud anyone who is trying to bring about change in the borough that allows children under supervision to die.

    Interestingly and ironically the word verification I’m about to type is “Simon nausea”.

  26. Vicki Morley 8 Oct 2009, 5:35pm

    What’s really disappointing is that all political parties in Britain seem to be going out o their way to praise civil partnerships, but there is this assumption that we’ve reached equality and things stop here.
    Very subtly, everyone seems to have missed the fact that we have stopped short of equal rights and that we could be pushing for gay marriage.

  27. Vicki Morley is quite right! However, with Duncan Smith’s recommendation that some rights which civil partners currently enjoy be downgraded, the hope of gay civil marriage is certainly a forlorn one.

  28. Oh for f…cks sake! has this become a conversation between two people only, why not agree to disagree guys?

  29. Do you not see the irony of you saying the likes of Simon and myself are spilling the NuLabour party line vulpus_rex. While a real card carrying NuTory member/employee is posting the party line from NuConservative central office.

    BTW I am not voting for NuLabour or the NuTories in the next election so you are wrong about me.

  30. @ Vulpus.

    You said in post 18, point 2: “IDS is not homophobic, he happens to disagree with the importance placed by others on the right of both female parents to have their name on a birth certificate after IVF. Again you massively trivialise homophobia by describing a difference of opinion as such.”

    I’m surprised you do not see why it is so important for both female parents to have both names on the child’s birth certificate after IVF treatment. Without the second parent’s name on the certificate, she has absolutely no legal right to continue seeing her child in the even of a breakdown in the parents’ relationship. For example: If a same-sex female couple are together for 12 years, then break up, despite being co-parents for 12 years, only one of the parents has any legal right to continue raising & supporting the child, the other does not.

    Surely you can see that, for same-sex couple parents, the parental rights for the non-biological mother, rather than the sperm-donating father who took no part in raising the child, is indeed hugely important as an issue.

    There is no reasonable reason to not have bother their names on the certificate. Iain Duncan Smith, as you rightly stated, does not see this as an important issue in regards to keeping family units together. However, in not supporting this, it will result in unnecessary heartache and same-sex family unit anguish as former partners end up dragging things out in the courts because the present legislation has let them down.

    Speak to anyone who was raised by same-sex parents, by IVF or otherwise, and I’ll bet they’ll strongly disagree that IDS’s stance on this issue is NOT homophobic.

    Remember, all we want are the same rights that any heterosexual would want for themselves, their children and their family. Nothing more and nothing less.

    Finally. Just because there are a lot of people on here who disagree in general with the Tories stance on various issues, really doesn’t make them pro-labour or “lefties” at all. To label so many people ignorant, without knowing the reasons behind their opinions, actually makes yourself sound very silly indeed. I have no love for labour, but neither do I care for a political party with a very narrow view of how people should be, how the family unit should be (we all have brothers, sisters, etc after all, not just the 2.4 children + ‘Spot’-the-dog model).

    You also say in point 1 that we are ignoring everything else about the Tories on account of their homophobia. Well that’s simply because it is not just their homophobia during their time in power, but their actions in actively voting against legislation that would progress the human rights of gay people in this country in more recent years. Any search of the public whip website to check their MPs (compared to the voting record by MPs of other political parties) will tell you if their voting matches their words or not. Why on earth would anyone would choose to vote for a party that only cares for some of its law-abiding hard-working population, but not others. “Animal Farm” comes to mind.

    On point three, in response to criticism of DC supporting only 3 out of 13 votes on gay human rights in parliament, you said “isn’t that more than Gordon Brown?”. Now, as I said, I don’t have any love for labour. However, had we not been in europe, many of our rights, as dictated by the european cout of human rights, would never have transpired. The Tories want us out of europe, so we would not have had such protection in such a case.

    No Vulpus, it is not those of us who dislike or disagree with the Tories that are ignorant, it is you. I’m open-minded enough to have listened to many of the words coming out of the Tory conference this week and then research to find out the facts behind the rhetoric. Much of it does not tally up. DC talks about being honest with voters, he has not been honest with the LGBT community because one cannot espouse commitement to gay rights whilst voting against our equality protections, one cannot talk about having moved on from the bad old days with a few gay MPs to “prove it” when they actively form alliances with extreme right-wing parties in Europe (remember, the polish law & justice party are also anti-semitic and draw much criticism from their own population as well as Amnesty International & the European Court of Human Rights). And they cannot expect, despite all the words to the contrary, for LGBT people of Britain to help them into No.10 Downing Street until the prove with actions, not words, that they will support us and help us, like they would for other parts of the population.

  31. Could the Tories here please post just one gay-friendly policy that is specifically Conservative? You all keep on saying that the Conservatives have changed and will do great things for the country – but what will they do that is positive for the lgbt population of the UK? I can’t believe that this is a tricky, sly or anti-Tory question to ask.

  32. David Camelion will change his colours to appease to gay audiences, but make no mistake, that change is only skin deep.

  33. John (Derbyshire) 8 Oct 2009, 7:26pm

    Thats just the start George,justin and Charles. Aftr that will come the re-introduction of Clause 28 via the “back door”. I am sure IDS still thinks it was a good idea!

  34. The whole point of Civil Partnership is that it is meant to be the legal and fiscal equivalent of heterosexual marriage.

    The question is will the Tories, sometime in the future, seek to ‘water down’ Civil Partnership by, for example, granting married couples tax breaks which do not apply to civil partners.

    Has David Cameron made any commiment not to do any such thing?

  35. Will Mr Cameron comment on this evidence showing he lied about his Polish friends in Europe. Or has Mr Cameron going to use the arrogance he gets from being a distance cousin of the queen and all that blue blood. I bet he sticks by bis Oxford Uni buddy and fellow Bullingdon club member the Polish foreign minister.

    Shortly after his nomination as Prime Minister, Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, when asked about his attitude to homosexual people said: If a homosexual person is trying to ‘infect’ others, then it is a breach of freedom and the state must step in – Amnesty International, (2006). Report on the observance of gay and lesbian people‘s rights in Poland and Latvia.

    Paweł Zyzak,the editor-in-chief of PiS’s W prawo zwrot! (Right about face!) magazine published an article in which he called homosexuals animals and the devil’s envoys whose aim is to destroy the Church. “The devil failed to destroy the Church using people, so he wants to use the ‘animals’. Faggots, making use of some individual acts of physical and verbal aggression, skilfully win sympathy, posing as victims of repressions and ‘intolerance’. Their combat is joined by intellectuals either fascinated by the movement or professed faggots.” – Gazeta Wyborcza, 07.08.06,,65648,3532930.html

    Waldemar Bońkowski, a PiS MP, and the plenipotentiary of the party in the Kościerzyna Commune, posted a banner on the party’s headquarters in the town of Kościerzyna reading: “Lesbians and gays today, zoophiles tomorrow.. and the day after tomorrow? Is this freedom and democracy? This is syphilisation! The most eminent Pole [Pope John Paul II] is looking down at us from the Lord’s House. Where are you heading, Polish nation?” – Trybuna, 16.09.06.

    City councillors of Law and Justice, Przemyslaw Aleksandrowicz and Jacek Tomczak commented on an Equality parade in Poznan 2005: “ …this might concern the promotion of such inclinations as paedophilia, zoophilia and necrophilia; promoting a lifestyle that promotes debauchery even independently of so called orientation is a blatant breach of the rules of social conduct, we do not know if soon paedophilia, necrophilia and zoophilia will start to be treated merely as orientations.”

    The President proposes his own ratification conditions – Lech Kaczynski warns against Germans and Homosexuals. The President gave a televised address to the nation in which he claimed that he could not agree to ratifying the Lisbon Treaty. In explaining his reasoning, he said that not everything in the EU has to be good for Poland, and claimed that the Fundamental Rights Charter could force Poland to accept marriages which would go against the morals of most Poles. He also showed the wedding photo of a same-sex couple from the U.S. getting married in Canada without their approval.,1542741,wiadomosc.html

    Other political group are sceptical: PiS wants the Sejm to deal with homosexuals. PiS says “no” to granting homosexual couples the same rights as those of a traditional family, which is why they will propose a bill for a resolution in the Sejm to stop the Council of Europe from interfering in the Polish legal system which deals with issues of morality and family issues. The leader of the PiS party, Przemyslaw Gosiewski hopes that other parties in the Parliament will support it. “The defense of the traditional family is guaranteed in the Constitution”,1576602,0,1,pis-chce–by-sejm-zajal-sie-homoseksualistami,wiadomosc.html

    The previous PiS government’s Ombudsperson for Children, Ewa Sowińska, who made the infamous accusation of the Teletubbies being “homosexual,” explained that “Homosexuality breeds paedophilia. We see such people enter our schools ever more aggressively” (Gazeta Wyborcza, April 23-24, 2007).

    Maria Nowak, a PiS MP during the previous Sejm, feels that homosexuality is something “not quite natural.” “I do not see a reason why homosexuals should be invited to schools. It is their private matter. There is no need to talk about it too much or pay so much attention to it” (Gazeta Wyborcza, March 14, 2007).

    MP Stanisław Pięta bluntly stated that: “Homosexuality is a taboo and it [sic] is the achievement of our civilization. Just like we do not relieve ourselves in public” (Gazeta Wyborcza, Warsaw edition, April 8, 2006).

  36. Very nice work Abi1975, very nice!

  37. Well done, Abi. You are a credit to gay and lesbian people all! Except fakes like Vulpus, Monkeychops, et al.

  38. Thanks to the person above who provided the link to the following letter, published at

    Letter to the Editor

    From the President of Kampania Przeciw Homofobii
    (Campaign Against Homophobia)

    As Poland’s nationwide LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) organization which works towards equal rights for all citizens, I would like to express our deep concern and protest at the statements made by David Cameron, the Leader of the Conservative Party on Sky News on October 7, 2009 regarding the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS).

    He claimed that he did not believe “the Law and Justice Party are homophobic”. In such case we are afraid that he has been misinformed about the extent of PiS’s homophobic sentiments.

    It is worth reminding Mr. Cameron that the current President of Poland, Lech Kaczynski, banned the Pride parade in Warsaw twice while he was mayor of the city and member of the PiS party.

    Later, when PiS gained control of the government in 2005, the Minister of Culture Kazimierz Michał Ujazdowski said: “We should not confuse brutal homosexual propaganda with the calls for tolerance. This is some sort of madness, and from the point of view of that madness, our rule will be a black night.”

    In many senses, their rule was a black night as their government took many measures to take away the rights of LGBT people, such as a proposed bill to ban homosexual propaganda in schools which propagated a sense of terror amongst teachers and students regarding an already highly stigmatized group.

    It is true that the PiS party is against same-sex marriage and adoption. However, we do not feel this is adequate in judging if PiS is homophobic. Because not only is PiS against same-sex marriage, but they are also against any form of registered partnerships, they oppose including homophobic hate crimes as criminal in the penal code and many other measures which would assist in gaining full rights for LGBT citizens of Poland.

    Although members of the PiS party claim to be for equal rights, their political record shows exactly the opposite. We must remember that Poland is not a Catholic country, but a democratic country ruled by a Constitution which bans discrimination on all grounds.

    Therefore the civil and political rights of LGBT people in Poland can not be dismissed by claiming an opposition to a “European superstate”. We hope that Mr. Cameron if elected Prime-minister will rather uphold the standards of universal human rights in all European countries.

    Marta Abramowicz
    President, Kampania Przeciw Homofobii (Campaign Against Homophobia)
    Warsaw, October 8, 2009

  39. One of the first things David Cameron will want to do is Ban the Internet!

  40. Neville wrote
    “Duncan Smith is the head of the Centre for Social Justice, which recommended in July that some rights of same-sex partners who are not biological parents should be downgraded.”

    I think what Neville has pointed out is imperative and requires our urgent consideration and attention

    In my view “To be downgraded” is a euphemism

    Ian Duncan Smith has used this term as a rhetorical device to hide something unpleasant and offensive.

    * To be downgraded . . . is to have less of something
    * To be downgraded . . . is to occupy a lower position
    * To be downgraded . . . is to employ lower standards

    Translated into English I think this is what Ian Duncan Smith is really saying . . .

    * Heterosexuals should be more privileged than homosexuals
    * Heterosexuals should always have more social status than homosexuals
    * Heterosexuals should always be treated with more respect than homosexuals

    This is Ian Duncan Smiths real agenda . . . and it is unpleasant and offensive

    Do you really want to be a second class citizen?

  41. Like we care. Remember Cameron needs to win a hundred and one new seats just to have a one-seat majority. I don’t believe it will happen.

  42. If the tories get in, EVERYONE except the upper middle classes will suffer. LGBT people seem the only ones who’ve realised it yet!!!!

  43. Sister Mary Clarence 8 Oct 2009, 11:38pm

    Darrien – yes – David Cameroon has stated that the Conservatives will treat civil partnerships and marriage as equal. It has been stated that when refering to ‘marriage’ this term included civil partnerships. I believe Labour are maintaining that the two are not the same.


    “If the tories get in, EVERYONE except the upper middle classes will suffer. LGBT people seem the only ones who’ve realised it yet!!!! ”

    Labour have lost the BME vote. They have lost the council estate vote and they have lost the gay vote. Do you NEVER read, listen to, or watch the news?

  44. Sister Mary Clarence 8 Oct 2009, 11:43pm

    Could I also just confirm to the various numpties on board that the Centre for Social Justice is not actually the Conservative party.

    Various think tanks (left and right) have views on all sorts of things, and it makes poke all difference to party policy, so if you’ve got nothing better to do than cite what you heard when you were drunk and standing in the queue at the petrol station buying fish fingers and micro chips as fact, you really need to get out more (and preferably not just to the petrol station)

  45. There is no doubt that David Cameron appears to deliver all the right “Sound Bites” with regards LGBT issues

    . . . However that cannot be said for those he surrounds himself with . . . Ian Duncan Smith . . . Philippa Stoud to mention but a few.

  46. Sister Mary Clarence as Michael Winner says, “calm down, dear”.

    I tend to agree with Dave, the Tories have to overturn a hundred seat majority first. LGBT issues will not be upper most in peoples’ minds; many of the electorate will have tax credits to consider when casting their vote.

    Really, any Cameron lead government will only serve a Countryside Alliance agenda and reversal of fox hunting ban. They will also cause trouble for the divolved Parliament and a reduction of Scottish MPs at Westminster. I don’t think there would be any room in parliamentary time for LGBT issues of any kind.

    All the best.


  47. Poor Sister Mary has all the zeal of a convert, just like Anne Widdlebum! The point about the existence of several think tanks is irrelevant when it comes to Duncan Smith. Please remember that Cameron went out of his way in his speech to eulogise Duncan Smith. This folly coupled with an indication that the homophobic Roman Catholic will have a place in any possible Cameron administration leads to a certain unease at the very least!

  48. IDS’s Catholic agenda will always take precedence, although of course it will be presented as “family values”. He’ll have the same attitudes and the same approach as Ruth Kelly, supposedly intelligent people who swallow their Church’s claptrap verbatim.

  49. Cameron talks fluffy but he is in hock to the Right. He owes his position to them even though he doesn’t believe all the same things they do. Is he principled – or ruthless enough – to tackle them? Don’t hold your breath.

  50. No mention in your article that David Cameron will recognise both marriage AND civil partnerships in the tax system.

    Why not?

  51. Robert, ex-pat Brit 9 Oct 2009, 2:23pm

    Vicky, Mal, expect NO marriage equality in the UK, not going to happen. As for their being equal to marriage, where is that written in the law? The marriage causes act of 1973 has NOT been amended as far as I know to clarify it. There is NO law in the UK stating that gay couples can legally marry. If they are the same as marriage, why aren’t they officially recognised as such. Proof that they’re not is when you have to go overseas to legally marry. Upon your return, the legal marriage certificate you have in your hands is not recognised as a marriage but as a second class civil partnership. An obviously convenient case of dyslexia by the government be it tory or labour for that matter. This is not a question of semantics as the apologists who post here try to push on us. They’re in denial about a lot of things. Their argument is lame and you have to ask them, if civil partnerships are so equal to marriage, which of course they’re not….why is it that more countries are abandoning them for full marriage? Why?

  52. Simon Murphy 10 Oct 2009, 3:43am

    No 47: Vulpus Rex: you say: “Could I also just confirm to the various numpties on board that the Centre for Social Justice is not actually the Conservative party.”

    Of course it’s not. We all know that.

    But how appropriate is it to have a member of a specifically homophobic organisation, try to ‘mend broken society’?

    IDS is a homophobe.

    He should not be allowed anywhere near a post where he can try to inflict his homophobia on all of society.

  53. Cllr Stephen Ellis 10 Oct 2009, 2:26pm

    I love how people refer to David Cameron’s voting record on LGBT issues. Why doesn’t anyone ever refer to Gordon Brown? He’s never supported any LGBT issue!

    David Cameron rightly said that Civil Partnerships were one of the good things that Labour had done. He also said that marriage and civil partnerships should be recognised in the tax system. As many people are aware, he’s already said the Party was wrong over Section 28 and he has apologised for it. At an event I attended in London, he also admitted that his own voting record hadn’t been the best and that he too had been wrong. You can’t say fairer than that. I’ve never heard Gordon Brown speak on any LGBT matter let alone say anything open, honest or fair about such things.

    I’ve met Iain Duncan-Smith on a number of occasions. He is one of the most genuine and sincere people you could ever wish to meet. I don’t know what his personal views are on such matters and therefore I’m not going to comment. However, I should stress that the Centre for Social Justice is a separate body and is not part of the Conservative Party – like many think tanks. Therefore, it’s wrong to imply that such views would become Party policy.

    Stephen Ellis
    Deputy Chairman, LGBTory

  54. Sister Mary Clarence 10 Oct 2009, 3:02pm

    Well done mate – there’s some on here that don’t believe that people like you really exist – gay Tories, and elected as a local councillor as well.

    No doubt unless you were elected BECAUSE you were gay, rather than elected AND gay, they’ll still be in denial.

    They are still of the view that the world is flat also ….

  55. Pumpkin Pie 10 Oct 2009, 3:08pm

    I love how people refer to David Cameron’s voting record on LGBT issues. Why doesn’t anyone ever refer to Gordon Brown? He’s never supported any LGBT issue!

    We are voting for parties, not individuals. The vast majority of the Conservative party has a terrible record of voting for LGBT rights.

    I don’t know what his personal views are on such matters and therefore I’m not going to comment.

    Oh, he’s made it abundantly clear what his views on the matter are a couple of times. The links at the bottom of the page will help you find out, as will Google.

  56. Over the next few months, we will be experiencing an election campaign the likes of which we haven’t seen for a generation. During this time, we will all have to make our minds up as to which way we are going to vote. It has been made all the more difficult for me because although Labour has shown commitment to equality, it has consistently undermined the civil liberties of all of us, whether we are gay or straight. They have adopted an anti-democratic, managerial (read: dictatorial) approach to running the country with its targets, initiatives, focus groups and an obsession with managing from the centre. Only recently, I have received bullying letters from a quango and last week my civil partner was stopped and searched, for no reason, in St Pancras station for the purposes of preventing terrorism.

    My partner and I fear for the future of our country, which is falling apart before our eyes. We have gained equality, but lost some of our basic human rights along the way. Things are so bad now, especially now that the country is effectively broke, that we’ve decided to move to France for a better future.

    I find it disappointing that, on here, there is so much cant and mud-slinging. IDS’s recommendation that the right of same-sex couples to adopt be “downgraded” does not matter much to us and I suspect most other gay people are not really interested in the issue. Furthermore, nobody can take it for granted that all gay and lesbian people are in favour of gay adoption. I certainly am not in favour, neither is my partner. And I just think that there are more important issues to deal with right now.

    An elected government doesn’t just govern for minorities like us – they govern for everyone. We are sensible enough to look outwards at the real issues that affect us all. David Cameron, when referring to the surveillance state that had been created by New Labour, said that he would sweep the whole rotten edifice away and for that, and that alone, he gets my vote.

  57. Cllr Stephen Ellis wrote
    “I’ve met Iain Duncan-Smith on a number of occasions. He is one of the most genuine and sincere people you could ever wish to meet. I don’t know what his personal views are on such matters and therefore I’m not going to comment.”

    Sticking your head in the sand is one way of coping with your parties heterosexism and homophobia . . .

    With regards Mr Ian Duncan Smiths views with about the LGBT community – when he uses terms like “Downgrade” . . . let me put this succintly, we are not a community that will accept a second class status in relation to heterosexuals.

  58. Ursus is clearly not concerned with the principle of equality. This is underlined by the dismissal of gay adoption. Gay adoption per se is not the whole point which is the denial of equality for gay people. If this element of equality is removed because of Roman Catholic pressure (Duncan Smith), then what is the next step?
    Let us not forget that the Roman Catholic Church is strongly opposed to gay marriage and to civil partnerships.

  59. I assume, from the comments made above, that these are your opinions as opposed to a statement of fact. And yes, I am opposed to the principle of equality in all cases. I say that as a gay man. That is my opinion.

  60. Pumpkin Pie 11 Oct 2009, 10:56pm

    No person in the history of political debate has ever given a good reason for banning gay adoption. It’s a position that is both utterly inhumane and completely unscientific.

  61. What an Orwellian world Ursus lives in: Some animals are more equal than others!

  62. Sister Mary Clarence 22 Oct 2009, 4:14am

    ursus262 can I just thank yuo for such a sensible and thought provoking posting. I used to work for Labour and it is for a number of the reasons you have given that hey have lost my support.

    Very few people here actually see further that the single issue of equality (which ironically is all but out of the hands of the British government anyway).

    Like your partner I was recently the subject of an anti-terroist search, which at the time i believed was wrong and upon investigation I now find was illegal.

    Civil rights have gone down the toilet with the State closing in on us all the time. The anti-terroist police are now performing a number of the functions carried out by the ‘secret’ police in East Germany. New Labour has also introduced an Enabling Act, which fundamentally undermines the very principles of the democracy this country has enjoyed for centuries.

    It is frightening to watch the spread of State control over so many things and even more frightening that so few people are noticing or caring.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.